We were outsiders : the Metis and residential schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study looks at how the Métis were admitted to and discharged from the schools despite government policies lirniting their attendance.It also looks at how the Métis were treated at the schools and the impact that the schools have on cunent generations of Métis people.The study also reflects on the use of traumatic histories, Métis research rnethods and the state of Residential School history in Canada.The Government of Canada did not encourage Métis attendance and wanted to eliminate any federal responsibility towards supporting the Métis in Canada.Regardless, Métis attended the schools and generations of Métis people continue to be influenced by the intergenerational impacts of these schools today.The Métis were treated as outsiders in Residential Schools; they were treated differently by both teachers and administrators.The treatment of Métis students often mirrored how tliey were treated in their communities.Canada's agenda towards Aboriginal people disintegrated the relationship between government and the Métis, and Residential Schools were another way that the Métis were negatively affected by Canada's legacy of mistreating generations of Aboriginal people.It is intended for this study to reflect what Residential Schools meant to Métis lives fiom a Métis context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".